Closer Safety Net

A Government in Need Is a Government Indeed

Cheong Wa Dae hosted a lunch Tuesday for about 250 ``needy neighbors'' ― stall keepers, street cleaners and taxi drivers.

``I hate to say this, but the economy will likely get worse next year,'' President Lee Myung-bak told his guests. ``It is most important at a time like now to be kind to one another, among individuals, family members and neighbors.''

One might think Lee's remarks as just words to comfort and encourage people at a seasonable event ― if only he were not the president. Without a firm, specific commitment from the chief executive to protect the most vulnerable classes of our society during an unprecedented economic crisis, the occasion was another media event at best, or a brief anesthetic at worst.

Cabinet ministers responsible for welfare and employment announced equally good-to-see-but-little-to-grab programs for the working poor during their administrative briefing for 2009.

Seoul's plan to sharply expand the social safety network for the ``new poor'' calls for, among other things, creating 120,000 social service jobs, providing health care for dismissed workers at lower premiums rates, and including self-employed people forced to shut down their businesses in the government's list needing ``emergency help.'' All these ``temporary and flexible'' programs, as officials described them, appear natural and timely.

The problem is, the Ministry of Health and Welfare has failed to secure less than half of the budget to help finance these projects. This means they could end up as a Christmas lip service in the worst-case scenario. Come to think of it, however, there is nothing surprising with the dearth of money, as the government's property tax cuts for the top-1 percent of wealthy people will drain away the state coffers, in what probably is one of few such case in the world for now.

A more fundamental problem with these plans lies in the officials' own description ― they are temporary and flexible instead of firm and permanent. True, expanding social service programs creates two to three times more jobs than building roads and refurbishing rivers, the Korean version of New Deal programs, as the Lee administration claims. A more fundamental and lasting solution, however, is to find a new growth engine by cultivating a number of technology-oriented smaller businesses.

The Labor Ministry's policy for a more pliant labor market by cutting minimum wages and extending the minimal employment period of non-staff workers doesn't even deserve much consideration, as it will surely result in aggravating both the quality and quantity of jobs. Officials say this plan takes into account the real situation of employers amid their worsening financial situations. We would like to ask whether they have studied cases of exemplary labor policies in other countries, say, in Ireland, which has turned from the ``European patient'' to ``Celtic Tiger.'' The Irish government classifies corporate levels, not by their turnover but by their number of employees, likening tax breaks to companies' employment policies.

It is this fundamental turnaround of concept that enables officials to make an administrative U-turn. People say jobs are the best welfare programs because all people who are able and willing to work want to support their own lives, instead of relying on the sympathy of others, including the government.

The unions, particularly the so-called labor aristocrats at big businesses, like Hyundai Motor, should make some sacrifices to share jobs with less privileged workers, while the government and businesses must do all they can to save and create jobs.

Forcing bureaucrats and executives to go in this direction is the job of the chief executive. President Lee should find works befitting his office and leave the tear-jerk programs to first lady Kim Yoon-ok.